Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education: Transforming Learning, Assessment, and Academic Ethics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70577/cieninter.v4i3.131Keywords:
: generative artificial intelligence, agentic AI, higher education, educational assessment, academic ethics, personalized learning, academic integrity, institutional governance, algorithmic literacy.Abstract
The results show that GenAI enhances personalized learning, immediate feedback, and democratized access to knowledge, while introducing critical challenges in authentic assessment, intellectual property, and digital equity. Five dimensions of transformation are identified: (1) adaptive pedagogy, (2) reconfiguration of assessment, (3) new paradigms of academic ethics, (4) access gaps and algorithmic literacy, and (5) the emergence of agentic AI and institutional governance. Recent survey evidence shows student GenAI use moving from emergent adoption (roughly 50% in 2023) to near-universal use (92-95% in the UK, with comparable figures in the US by 2026), shifting institutional debate from detection toward resilient assessment design and 'AI fluency' as a learning outcome. The study concludes that effective integration of GenAI in higher education requires adaptable regulatory frameworks, critical competency development for students and faculty, and authentic assessments centered on higher-order cognitive processes. An expanded Educational AI Governance Model (MGE-IAG), now including an agentic-systems subsystem, is proposed to guide institutional policy and pedagogical practice.
Downloads
References
Adel, A., & Kandil, M. A. (2024). ChatGPT in education: A systematic review of empirical research. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(2), ep520. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14505 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14850
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500 DOI: https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2024). Generative AI can harm learning. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4895486 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4895486
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? Proceedings of FAccT 2021, 610-623. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
Biesta, G. J. J. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Paradigm Publishers.
Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arber, S., von Arx, S., ... & Liang, P. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07258.
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students' voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(43). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/mrz8h
Dahlke, J. A., Croco, K., Kotturi, Y., Klemmer, S. R., & West, J. D. (2024). How are instructors adapting to ChatGPT and other generative AI tools in their teaching? arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.06702.
Dai, W., Lin, J., Jin, F., Li, T., Tsai, Y. S., Gasevic, D., & Chen, G. (2023). Can large language models provide feedback to students? A case study on ChatGPT. Proceedings of ICALT 2023, 323-325. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT58144.2023.00103 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT58122.2023.00100
Doshi, A. R., & Hauser, O. P. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence enhances creativity. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 24-075. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4535536
Eke, D. O. (2023). ChatGPT and the assessment of learning outcomes. Information, 14(2), 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14020123 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/info14020123
Engageli. (2026, 13 de junio). 25 AI in education statistics to guide your learning strategy in 2026. https://www.engageli.com/blog/ai-in-education-statistics
Flaherty, C. (2025). Survey: Most college students use AI for coursework. Inside Higher Ed.
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., ... & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People — An ethical framework for a good AI society. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689-707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5
Freeman, J. (2025). Student Generative AI Survey 2025. HEPI–Kortext. https://www.hepi.ac.uk/reports/student-generative-ai-survey-2025/
Hirabayashi, K., et al. (2024). Undergraduate AI use at Harvard, Spring 2024 [informe institucional].
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2023). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58863/20.500.12424/4276068
Hu, K. (2023). ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base — analyst note. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/technology/chatgpt-sets-record-fastest-growing-user-base-analyst-note-2023-02-01/
International Center for Academic Integrity. (2021). The fundamental values of academic integrity (3ª ed.).
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 4(7), 100779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779
Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015). Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 179-187. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000062
Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727
Mignolo, W. D. (2009). Epistemic disobedience, independent thought and decolonial freedom. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(7-8), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409349275 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409349275
Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Sage Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985000
OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Policy Options / IRPP. (2026, 12 de junio). AI is forcing Canadian universities to rethink student assessment. https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2026/06/ai-university-assessment/
Sallam, M., Salim, N. A., Barakat, M., & Al-Tammemi, A. B. (2023). ChatGPT applications in medical, dental, pharmacy, and public health education. Narra J, 3(1), e103. https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v3i1.103 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v3i1.103
Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals' cognition: A dynamic interactional view. En G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions (pp. 111-138). Cambridge University Press.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.
Stokel-Walker, C. (2023). ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: Many scientists disapprove. Nature, 613, 620-621. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z
Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
TEQSA — Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. (2026). Gen AI – academic integrity and assessment reform. https://www.teqsa.gov.au/guides-resources/higher-education-good-practice-hub/gen-ai-knowledge-hub/gen-ai-academic-integrity-and-assessment-reform
Turnitin. (2026, 4 de marzo). AI-native academic integrity trends and impact. https://www.turnitin.com/blog/are-universities-ready-for-ai-native-academic-integrity
UNESCO. (2025). Encuesta a instituciones de educación superior sobre lineamientos de IA [informe institucional].
UPCEA. (2026, 8 de enero). The rise of the agentic AI university in 2026. https://upcea.edu/the-rise-of-the-agentic-ai-university-in-2026/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2026.101010
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., ... & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 5998-6008.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Woolf, B. P. (2009). Building intelligent interactive tutors. Morgan Kaufmann.
Yeadon, W., Inyang, O. O., Mizouri, A., Peach, A., & Testrow, C. (2024). The death of the short-form physics essay in the forthcoming AI era. Physics Education, 59(2), 025028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ad1ee8
Yilmaz, R., & Yilmaz, F. G. K. (2023). The effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool use on students' computational thinking skills, programming self-efficacy and motivation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100147 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100147
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Andrea Tatiana Cabezas Reyes, Mayra Alejandra Fiallos Sánchez, Paulina Iveth Vizcaíno Zúñiga, Israel Alejandro Maldonado Palacios, Germania Margarita Maldonado Palacios
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
